Dr Antonella Acinapura
FRAMING REALITY, CHOOSING THE TACTIC: The Islamic Jihad Movement in Palestine and the Second Intifada (2000-2005)
During the Second Intifada (200-2005), the Islamic Jihad Movement in Palestine (PIJ) – a group classified as terrorist by Western governments – employed a wide range of tactics to protest against Israel. Although political violence has long been the subject of academic inquiry in different fields, few studies focus on the role of framing in influencing the type, timing, and evolution of tactics. Towards addressing this gap, this research examines how the way in which PIJ perceived, interpreted and communicated about the reality of the Second Intifada relates to the selection and evolution of specific and different tactics over the time. Drawing upon a new dataset on PIJ repertoires of actions and a frame analysis of PIJ documentation, the findings indicate that PIJ actions should be approached as relational performances that communicated a symbolic message to different audiences, beyond its immediate targets. This, in turn, solves some of the puzzles regarding the mixed effects of repression on political violence. Furthermore, by analysing PIJ thought the lens of Social Movement Theory, this research contributes to de-orientalise the academic knowledge on this group and offers an understanding of militant Islamism as pragmatic and flexible, whose complexity challenges the simple labelling of a ‘terrorist’ organization as a whole.
The US State Department in the Wilderness: Central to the Peace Process, Exiled under Trump
During the Trump presidency the State Department exhibited a detached and rejected place. Donald Trump considered it part of the conspiratorial under-belly, often using the pejorative term ‘deep-state department’ and cast its specialist bureaucracy into the Washington wilderness. The State Department’s downgraded and maligned place within the Trump administration stands in contrast to its thriving role in Northern Ireland from 2001 to 2007. Throughout this time State determined American involvement in the region with responsibility for strategy falling to two successive directors of the Policy Planning Staff: Richard Haass and Mitchell Reiss. The sources and operations of these men’s decision-making authority enabled the US to intercede as a third-party actor with the results being pivotal to the restoration of devolution in May 2007.
Please note that the change in the time for this PIR seminar. Following seminars will take place at the usual noon time.
This is a hybrid event, in person in 22 University Square/01/005 and online on MS Teams
|Name||Dr Michele Crepaz|